32 Comments

That video of the airheaded Julie Bishop talking in a bitchy & juvenile way about Kevin Rudd (like a bloody school girl) shows exactly why we should not elect the Coalition. To stand up at a public forum and speak like that about the Prime Minister of this country is unbecoming of anyone, let alone a MP, let alone the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. Remember folks, if Abbott wins, this vacuum-headed piece of work with the funny hair will be 3rd-in-line to run the country. What a thought.

Public Letter To Tony Abbott: G’day Tony, As a constant and daily reader of Iain Hall’s SANDPIT which I hear you are. When you were training to be a priest at the seminar were you aware of pedophiles in the Catholic Church, and if aware did you report these crimes to the police. As the media and politicians on both sides of the fence are afraid to put this question to you, as a voter I would like to hear your answer. Nice to hear you like reading Ray Dixon’s comments, and best of all, like me you, think GD is a Muslim bashing arse-hole. God-Bless, Richard Ryan.

Wow, Abbott offers $20,000 loans for apprentices so they can buy tools. Gee, that’s a lot of money for tools; can anyone think of one apprentice who would need $20,000 worth of tools? Would an apprentice plumber or carpenter need that much? How about an apprentice chef – $20,000 worth of kitchen knives?

This is a con dressed up like it’s a big favour when it’s just a debt. Abbott will be putting kids in debt for things they don’t need (they’ll probably buy cars with it or gamble it!) and there’s no doubt this ‘generous’ loan of $20,000 will replace the present quite adequate $3,000 grant (ie a grant not required to be paid back) made to apprentices for the genuine purpose of buying tools. Abbott just hasn’t told us yet that the current $3,000 grant will be CUT.

That video of the airheaded Julie Bishop talking in a bitchy & juvenile way about Kevin Rudd…shows exactly why we should not elect the Coalition.

Julie Bishop an airhead? You’ve got to be joking or a dyed in the wool, rusted-on Labor supporter.

Speaking at that Liberal Party policy launch, hardly a ‘public function’, Bishop delivered a humorous and correct appraisal of our ‘Dear Leader’.

Recently she appeared on the Gen Y Channel 10 show, ‘This Week Live’ with comedian Tom Gleason. The program segment was titled not surprisingly ‘I Hate You, Change My Mind’. After the interview Gleason admitted that Bishop ‘tap danced all over my face’.

I know that Ray and Richard are aghast but the simple fact is that Julie Bishop is the epitome of an effective political player. Far from being an “air head” or a “Political Slut” she is smart, witty and has a good sense of humour that is self deprecating enough to allow her to send herself up on occasion. as she does in the Vid that GD linked too.
She is also a good sort who has that twinkle in the eye that makes most attractive to old codgers like me who understands that bodily perfection is less important than that special spark inside.

GD, just saying Julie Bishop is a “formidable force”, doesn’t make her one. It’s just your extreme right-wing biased opinion, an appeal to your own unqualified authority. Face it, if she were a Labor MP you’d be agreeing with me that she’s an airhead of the first order. And you’d go a lot further than that – like putting up cartoons of her with a strapped-on dildo, as you did with Gillard.

Then again, if she were a Labor MP she certainly wouldn’t be elevated to the lofty office of Deputy Leader, like she is with the Liberals.

Richard’s “slut” description is a bit harsh and perhaps he meant to say she’s a “political whore”, which would be an apt analogy, considering she’s got no loyalty and has transferred as Deputy to 3 consecutive leaders, being Nelson, Turnbull & Abbott. Any way the wind blows is Bishop’s motto. She switches her support almost as often as she drops her dacks. No policies, no morals, no principles and no thought going on in that vacant space between the ears.

Nope, she’s a lightweight and does no damage to Labor whatsoever. She’s an asset – for the other side.

Here’s a classic example of her airheadedness:

Rewind to AFL Grand Final Day 2010. The two sides playing off were St Kilda & Collingwood. In the pre-game ‘breakfast’ (broadcast on TV), Bishop gets up to say a few words on the game and who she’ll be barracking for. She comes out dressed in a red, white & black outfit (the colours of St Kilda), says a few words and is then asked who she’s supporting. She screams out “Collingwood” and punches the air. The whole audience bursts into laughter and she doesn’t get it.

Nope, she’s a lightweight and does no damage to Labor whatsoever. She’s an asset – for the other side.

Labor have been laid so low by thier own ineptitude that such sentiments are utter nonsense

Here’s a classic example of her airheadedness:

Rewind to AFL Grand Final Day 2010. The two sides playing off were St Kilda & Collingwood. In the pre-game ‘breakfast’ (broadcast on TV), Bishop gets up to say a few words on the game and who she’ll be barracking for. She comes out dressed in a red, white & black outfit (the colours of St Kilda), says a few words and is then asked who she’s supporting. She screams out “Collingwood” and punches the air. The whole audience bursts into laughter and she doesn’t get it.

That sounds like she was having a good lend of the followers of your Faith Ray by signalling one thing in her outfit and then confounding expectations by giving a contradiction in her answer,However even if it was an error who cares? Sport is not that important in the overall scheme of things and its rather silly to expect that every MP should have an intimate knowledge of AFL.

Iain, I watched it. She was not “having a lend” – and it doesn’t require “intimate knowledge of AFL” to know the colours of the competing teams at an official function you’re being invited to speak at. She was completely non-plussed by the audience’s reaction. She also copped a fair pasting for her bitchiness in using the event to make political comparisons about Labor. Remember, this was soon after Gillard had won the election. Bishop sounded like a sore loser.

Anyway, just to prove I’m not lying about her outfit, here’s a shot of it. It’s so very ‘St Kilda':

AFL GRAND FINAL BREAKFAST
Deputy leader of the opposition Julie Bishop walks the blue carpet at the traditional Grand Final Breakfast at the Exhibition Centre in Melbourne, Saturday Sept. 25, 2010. The Breakfast is the main event before the start of the Grand Final between Collingwood against St Kilda, played at the MCG

Oh, and she was then (and may still be) on the board of AFL club West Coast in Perth, Iain, so you’d think she should have known the colours of the teams. It was either an airheaded mistake or a bad joke that backfired. Take your pick – either way it confirms there’s not much going on upstairs.

Just proves she’s a very wise woman backing Collingwood, only fools would even given any consideration to StKilda except maybe to catch a tram out of there. StKilda would have to rate as low as Essendon at the moment, the pits, funny they have similar colours.

GD, just saying Julie Bishop is a “formidable force”, doesn’t make her one. It’s just your extreme right-wing biased opinion, an appeal to your own unqualified authority.

Ray, saying she isn’t a strong force in the Liberal Party is ‘an appeal to your own unqualified authority’.

Then again, if she were a Labor MP she certainly wouldn’t be elevated to the lofty office of Deputy Leader

Of course not, Ray. Labor only elevates MPs of impeccable character and intelligence to ‘lofty office’. Peter Slipper being the prime example.

Richard’s “slut” description is a bit harsh and perhaps he meant to say she’s a “political whore”, which would be an apt analogy, considering she’s got no loyalty and has transferred as Deputy to 3 consecutive leaders

When the Labor caucus knifed Kevin Rudd, all the female cabinet ministers went with Gillard. When Rudd knifed Gillard, all the female cabinet ministers ran back to Rudd.

I don’t remember you calling them ‘political whores’.

I posted a video showing Julie Bishop eruditely disproving the silly statements made by the Channel 7 hosts. She spoke commandingly and incisively. You can watch the clip again, it’s still there.

Yet you reckon she’s an airhead based on her not knowing a football team’s colours.

My opinion is shared by Iain as well. And millions of Coalition voters.

Your opinion is shared by not so many millions of Labor voters and of course, Richard Ryan.

GD, the footy colours blunder was just one of many public blunders Bishop has made that more than adequately demonstrate her air-head status. There’s also the time she breached national security by claiming Australian Defence Agencies (like ASIS) engaged in issuing false passports to its personnel. I could go on, but the point is that I, unlike you, am not appealing to my own aurthority to describe Julie Bishop as Australia’s highest ranked air-head. I merely point to her public record, which speaks for itself. Do try harder, GD.

Comments are closed.

Welcome to the Sandpit

I love a good argument so please leave a comment

Please support the Sandpit

Do you feel lucky?

Copyright

Portions of any work that are quoted are reproduced on the basis of the "fair dealing for purpose of criticism or review" section 41 of the Copyright Act 1968.
let's look at the Australian Copyright Council's fact sheet on Fair Use:

The Federal Court has stated that “criticism and review” involves making a judgment of the material concerned, or of the underlying ideas. Criticism and review may be strongly expressed, and may be expressed humorously, and need not be balanced. The defence can apply where the criticism or review takes place in a commercial context, such as in published books or newspapers or on commercial television.

However, the court emphasised that the purpose of criticism or review must be genuine. If the person has other motives – especially if these motives involve using the material to make a profit, or using a competitor’s material to
divert customers from the competitor – the fact that they have also engaged in a form of criticism or review is not
enough to prevent the use from infringing copyright

All other content on this site is copyright Iain Hall and may not be reproduced in any form with out explicit permission of the author.

Comment Copyright

Anyone who comments at the Sandpit under a pseudonym does so on the clear understanding that by doing so they are giving any and all rights and ownership of those comments to the site-owner who may reproduce them in any form or at any other site or venue entirely at his own discretion.